Xinhuanet: From the case of Sany v. Obama, we can see the new thinking of Chinese enterprises in protecting their rights internationally

Source: Xinhuanet

Xinhuanet, Beijing, August 16 (Reporter Luo Yufan) With the rapid development of China's economy, more and more Chinese enterprises have begun to turn their attention to the broad international market. However, when the best Chinese companies stepped onto the international stage, it was not only flowers, applause and wealth that followed, but also increasingly fierce competition and trade frictions under various "protectionism". From the "double anti-dumping" investigation of Chinese photovoltaic companies in Europe and the United States, to the suspicion and exclusion of well-known companies such as Huawei, ZTE, and Sany in the United States in the name of "national security", what kind of attitude should be taken to meet the increasingly tense trade frictions and all kinds of unfair treatment has become an urgent issue for Chinese companies to face "going global".

In October 2012, RALLS, an affiliate of Trinity, which banned the construction of wind farms in the United States on the grounds of "threatening U.S. national security," took U.S. President Barack Obama, who signed the executive order, to court in the United States. The revelation of the case in which a Chinese private company sued the US president caused a strong shock at home and abroad. Behind this seemingly "decided" lawsuit, there are many things to think about beyond the outcome.

The U.S. market, which is 5661 open in the world*, why does it frequently turn on red lights for private companies from China? On the surface, the problem seems to lie with the Chinese companies themselves: in the eyes of the Americans, China is not a fully market economy, and the private enterprises that have succeeded at home themselves maintain close contacts and ties with the Chinese government, which, combined with the political identity of the entrepreneurs themselves, makes it very easy for the "inclusive" American market to label Chinese companies as ideological. Whether it is Huawei, ZTE, or Sany, most of them are first labeled, and then rejected by "unwarranted" reasons.

Because of this, many people suggest that Chinese companies should learn to follow the local customs when "going out", and grasp the timing and strategy to avoid irritating the sensitive nerves of Westerners...... However, timing and strategy are important, but in today's increasingly fierce international competition and the escalation of political and economic games between countries, unilateral thinking about timing and strategy still seems a bit wishful thinking.

In fact, the United States has repeatedly raised the stick of "national security", and what the United States wants to protect is far more than national security, but also uneasy about the strong rise of China's economy and the growing competitiveness of Chinese companies. Behind the political face, there is still the economic problem of trade protectionism.

In the face of the "colored glasses" of the United States and European countries, the first thing Chinese companies should do is to no longer remain silent. As a Chinese enterprise that abides by the laws of the host country and respects the rules of the market, when its legitimate rights and interests are infringed, it is undoubtedly a great progress to choose to express reasonable demands with a more confident attitude and a more rational legal approach. And this attempt, in fact, has also paid off.

* At first, it was widely believed that the case of Trinity v. President of the United States would not be accepted, but in February this year, the District Court for the District of Columbia formally accepted the case. The court found that there were procedural issues in the confiscation of the Sany wind power project by the Oba President Ma, and that Sany's lawsuit was reasonable.

On July 11, local time in the United States, the case of RALLS, an affiliated company of Trinity, sued Obama and the U.S. Foreign Investment Review Board, and another hearing was held in the U.S. District Court for the District of Washington, D.C., and the results are expected to be announced in September. During the second trial of Trinity v. Obama, the fifth round of the U.S.-China Economic and Strategic Dialogue was held in Washington, D.C. After this round of dialogue, the US side pledged to treat Chinese companies investing in the United States fairly and maintain an open investment environment for Chinese investors, including state-owned enterprises. The U.S. side also committed that all CFIUS investment reviews are based on national security, not economic or other national policies.

The lawsuit, which is still ongoing, is seen by many international relations students as more important than the outcome, and sets an example for Chinese companies investing in the United States to stand up against injustice. Chen Fengying, a user of international economic issues and a scholar at the China Institute of Contemporary International Relations, said: "If this case gives us an explanation, this will be our success." ”